- From: Stella Mitchell <cleo@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 14:33:16 -0400
- To: RIF <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <OFEC4C922B.BAAE7E71-ON85257491.0000F385-85257492.0065EC79@us.ibm.com>
Hi Harold and Michael,
BLD looks quite good. I included some comments below.
Stella
Comments:
----------------
In syntax, BLD defines an import profile to be a TERM and says that the
semantics of 2-argument Import is given in SWC. SWC says "We note here
that
in the RIF-BLD profiles can be arbitrary terms. Here we are concerned
only with the
restricted case that profiles are IRI constants." So, is the semantics
of 2-argument
imports for BLD adequately covered in SWC?
Abstract:
Last sentence:
isn't it more accurate to say:
"The XML serialization syntax of RIF-BLD is specified via a
mapping from
the presentation syntax and with XML Schema."
--or --
"The XML serialization syntax of RIF-BLD is specified via a
mapping from
the presentation syntax. A normative XML schema is also
provided."
Section 2:
1st para, 4th sentence:
This syntax --> The presentation syntax
(because the sentence about math english is in between, and
so the reference may not be clear)
Section 2.5
2nd bullet:
1st sub bullet:
1st sentence says there is one subset per arity. There
could be two, right?
--for external and not external. The 2nd sub bullet may
be intended to further
refine the first sub bullet, but I don't think it's
clear.
The second sentence of the 1st sub-bullet is not part of
the defintion, right,
but is a consequence of the first sentence and the
defintion of arity?
what about:
-- A number of subsets for predicate symbols such that:
-- There is a separate subset for each symbol
arity. Note that, based on
the definition of arity, this means that
positional and named-argument
predicate symbols are in different subsets.
-- The symbols for externally defined predicates
are in separate subsets
from the other predicate symbols.
or
-- A number of subsets for predicate symbols such that:
-- The symbols in each subset share the same
arity, and external predicate
symbols are in separate subsets from other
predicate symbols. Note
that, based on the definition of arity, this
means that positional and named-
argument predicate symbols are in different
subsets.
add a blank line between 2nd and 3rd bullets of partitioning section,
and update
heading of 3rd bullet to same form as heading of 2nd bullet.
Definition (Imported document)
maybe add a note calling attention to the fact that only
one-argument
import directives are considered here.
Section 3.3
1st para
before applying the truth valuation,TVali, in the next section.
-->
before applying the truth valuation, TVali, defined in the next
section.
Section 3.6
2nd para:
From now on --> For the purposes of this definition ?
is the document of phi --> is the document of formula phi
(because this is the first mention of phi in this section)
Section 5
subsection "RIF-BLD specific clauses"
I think a few sentences above this subsection saying what it is
about, or for, would be helpful.
2nd bullet:
"A conformant RIF-BLD consumer is a conformant BLDt,e
consumer if T..."
-->
"A conformant RIF-BLD consumer is a conformant BLDt,e
consumer in which T..."
(i think it makes it more clear that BLD consumer is
being defined in
terms of BLDt,e consumer)
are specified in the RIF-DTB --> are specified in RIF-DTB
externally defined terms --> externally defined functions
and predicates ?
(it's written like that in most other places)
Section 6.1 (list numbering and lettering below is as in the wiki
version)
item #2 (assignment of signatures)
sub item d:
do there need to be separate signatures for externally
defined
functions and predicates? Signatures are supposed to
match
up with contexts, and section 2.5 defines separate
contexts
for external symbols.
2nd para of sub item d:
"of one particular arity or with certain argument
names"
--> according to the definition of arity in
section 2.5,
"of one particular arity" would be
enough here?
(because it covers "with certain
argument names")
"externally defined function...or an externally
defined predicate symbol"
--> add "symbol" after function or remove
from after predicate.
sub item h
predicate names or function symbols -->
predicate or function symbols
item #3 (Supported types of terms)
"in order to keep BLD relatively compact"
say compact in what aspect - to keep the definition
compact?
item #4 (Required symbol spaces)
requires the following symbols spaces defined in... -->
requires the symbols spaces defined in...
(they're not actually listed in following text)
item #8 (Supported formulas)
1st sub bullet
"A RIF-BLD condition is an atomic formula, a
conjunctive or
disjunctive combination of atomic formulas with
optional
existential quantification of variables, or..."
-->
"A RIF-BLD condition is an atomic formula with optional
existential quantification of variables, a conjunctive
or
disjunctive combination of atomic formulas with
optional
existential quantification of variables, or..."
Section 6.2
2nd para:
lists the parameters of the semantic framework, which one need
to specialize
-->
lists the parameters of the semantic framework that can be
specialized.
(or if not the above, then: which one need --> which one
needs)
Section 6.4
precisely those datatypes and externals, which are specified in
-->
precisely the datatypes and externals specified in -->
Other wording:
-------------------
Overview:
2nd bullet:
last occurrence of "RIF framework for logic dialects" doesn't
match the
capitalization of the other occurrences in the spec (which have
Logic and
Dialects capitalized)
Example 1:
rather than store any of them --> rather then store them
from sell relationships (e.g., stored as facts, as exemplified
by the second line):
-->
from sell relationships that are stored as facts (e.g. as in
the second item in the Group below).
Section 2.1
3rd to last para:
are used in abridged representations of IRIs -->
enable abridged representions of IRIs.
3rd to last para:
remove "symbol: from before Document and Group, or
add it before Import
Section 2.2
last para:
and, as a special case, can be variables -->
and so, as a special case, can be variables
last sentence:
remove the parens (but keep the sentence)
Section 2.3
Definition (Formula)
item 2, last sentence:
premises --> premises (bodies)
(because in the following rest of the doc, sometimes
premise is used and sometimes body).
item 4:
among variables ?V1...?Vn in the quantifiation part -->
among the variables ?V1...?Vn
(it's written like that in item 5, and reads better)
para after the numbered list:
In this definition, --> In the definition of Formula,
Section 2.4
1st para:
term/formula --> term or formula
last sentence:
The sentence begins "In particular" and ends
"and so on," which is not a good combination.
How about: "This means that it may..."
Section 2.6
1st para:
we have been using --> we have used
1st bullet:
last sentence:
remove the parens and put a colon between the preceding
sentence and this one.
Section 2.6.1
3rd para:
represents an identifier of the symbol space -->
represents the identifier of the symbol space
Section 3.2
para just before "The effect of datatypes"
well formed --> well-formed
last para:
are not datatypes mentioned in DTS --> are not datatypes
included in DTS
Section 4
2nd para:
by EBNF and XML Schema --> by EBNF or XML Schema
Section 4.3.2
1st para:
dealt with -> handled
Received on Saturday, 26 July 2008 18:34:22 UTC